COMPARISON BETWEEN TWO PIECES
Differing in nationality and era, many would be hasty to suggest that these two pieces have no similarities. However, the first movement of Aaron Copland’s Ballet, ‘Billy the Kid’ (Piece 1), and the second movement of Bedrich Smetana’s six symphonic poems, ‘Vltava’ (Piece 2), exhibit a number of both similarities and differences. Copland and Smetana were nationalistic composers, meaning that they incorporated musical ideas and motifs commonly identified within a specific country, including folk tunes, melodies, rhythms, and harmonies.
Speed
Piece 2 has an initial speed indication of Allegro commodo non agitato, whereas Piece 1 is marked with Allegro. Both pieces fluctuate in speed, with constantly changing time signatures and tempo markings. As both of these works are relatively long, this fluctuation in speed creates contrast and changing atmospheres, utilized in a way that effectively captures the audience’s attention.
Regardless of the similarity in tempo indications, with both pieces being played at a brisk speed, the illusion produced is that Piece 2 is substantially faster paced than Piece 1. Firstly, this is created through the time signatures utilized at the beginning of each piece. Piece 1 begins in simple duple time, whereas Piece 2 begins in compound duple. Having a beat split up into three instead of two contributes to the feeling of Piece 2 being at a quicker tempo than Piece 1. Secondly, particularly at the beginning of the piece, Piece 2 constantly has at least one instrument playing in continuous semi-quavers. This helps to create the illusion of Piece 2 being quicker.
In direct contract to the modern era, the classical era was known for its simplicity; as such, the time signatures and tempo markings, more often than not, remained the same throughout an entire piece of music. Smetana’s composition (Piece 2) demonstrates a slight deviation from this, introducing new time signatures and tempo markings on the arrival of new themes. Moreover, the incessantly frequent tempo and time signature changes in Piece 1 are truly representative of the less structural and unpredictable compositional style of 20th century composers.
Time signature
As previously stated, the initial time signature is the first major difference between these two pieces. Piece 1 begins in simple duple time (cut time or 2/2), whereas Piece 2 begins in compound duple time (6/8). Each time signature is conducted with two beats per bar, however, the number of notes played within one beat will differ. These accord with the styles of the pieces and the mood the composers were wishing to portray, with the 6/8 time signature in Piece 2 allowing it the semiquavers to flow more fluently and the cut time signature in Piece 1 portraying a more Western style.
Both pieces change time signatures throughout; Piece 1 more frequently than Piece 2. The time signature changes in Piece 2 are more sectional than the first, in the sense that the introduction of a new theme or new idea brings with it the introduction of a new time signature. In contrast to this, Piece 1 occasionally changes time signatures bar by bar (e.g. 190-197, where each bar alternates between 4/8 and 5/8), creating confusion, yet effective rhythmic repetition, and the necessary suspense required at specific times.
Dynamics
A wide range of dynamics has been utilized in both Piece 1 and 2. This creates contrasts within the pieces themselves, and, overall, makes the compositions more captivating. Both of these pieces begin softly, with Piece 1 marked mezzo piano and Piece 2 marked piano. This allows both pieces to gradually built throughout the music, and ultimately end on fortissimo.
As with all, or at least the majority, of orchestral compositions, composers tend to utilize the timbre and natural dynamics of the individual instruments and their ranges in order to obtain the requisite dynamic. For instance, in forte sections, composers are more likely to incorporate the brass section or the full orchestra. This has been a technique that both Copland and Smetana have skillfully used. Therefore, at the beginning of Piece 2, only the flutes (in their lower register) and pizzicato violins are used to portray the piano dynamic, and, similarly, at the beginning of Piece 1, only the piccolo, tin whistle, violins and violas are used. In comparison, the whole orchestra plays in bars 277-289 of Piece 1, thus helping the fortissimo dynamic to be portrayed.
Most pieces, particularly orchestral pieces, in the 19th and 20th centuries tend to tell a story. Rather than the need to begin abruptly with a loud dynamic marking, both Piece 1 and 2 use the technique of a subtle introduction; they tell the story from the very beginning. The aim of the beginnings of these pieces is not to immediately capture the audience’s attention, but to ease them into the story line and ultimately engage them in it by taking them on a journey.
Both pieces make constant use of dynamic changes throughout. However, Copland uses these more aggressive and abruptly (typical of the modernistic period), whereas Smetana uses more gradual changes, which effectively represent swells and surges in the river, and help portray the imagery and vastness of the Moldau.
Rhythm
Another similarity between these two pieces is the use of syncopation. Although Copland uses this effect much more frequently than Smetana, both composers have used this technique to drive the music forward, intensify sections, and make the piece more interesting overall.
Syncopation plays a large part of modern music. Classical and early Romantic compositions scarcely exhibited this feature. Syncopation helps give the music a sense of unpredictability and unevenness at the necessary times. Additionally, they are sometimes used to confuse time signatures, without in fact changing them (e.g. Piece 1, bars 58-81 where it appears to be in 3/4, regardless of the time signature).
Piece 1 utilizes syncopation a lot more than Piece 2. This is typical of the eras of which either composer was from. Being a 20th century modern composer, Copland’s music is typical of that, through incorporating such new techniques to his compositional style. Copland has used relatively short note values combined with plentiful syncopation to perfectly capture the laidback atmosphere of the Wild West. In comparison, Smetana was only beginning to move away from the traditional classical style of composition, and was cautious in his use of syncopation.
Structure
Both Piece 1 and 2 make use of different themes throughout, and re-introduce the ideas throughout the entirety of the piece. The imagery created by Smetana is very clear, and is strongly represented by each individual section names, e.g. ‘Hunt in the Woods’. These section titles perfectly resemble the imagery produced by the music. The structure of Copland’s ballet is much more vague in comparison to Smetana’s incontrovertible Rondo form. This rondo form used by Smetana consists of a theme A that is frequently repeated throughout the piece in variations.
Structure of compositions began to taper and become less apparent nearing the 20th century. Smetana was still stuck in the structural rut that existed in the 19th century, along with other Romantic composers. Conversely, Copland was willing to venture outside of this. Compositions from the modern era tend to be more focused on expansion of themes in order to tell stories with them, rather than on composing within a set structure. 20th century music was all about innovations, creativity, and exploration, and Copland exemplifies this in Piece 1.
Texture
As previously mentioned, to emphasize the varying dynamic levels, both pieces utilize the different textures available within the orchestra. Through changes in the textures, greater contrast in dynamics and timbres has been achieved, and hence, a greater portrayal of the atmosphere and mood. Both composers skillfully used this element to their advantage.
Piece 1, however, changes the textures used more abruptly than Piece 2. This can be seen, for example, in bars 106 – 108 in Piece 1, in comparison to Smetana’s gradual tapering of the instruments, layer by layer, as seen in bars 165 – 185. This yet again exemplifies the compositional style differences between the 19th and 20th centuries, where the latter is more experimental and unpredictable than the former.
Timbre
Distinct changes in timbre and sound are regularly heard in both of these pieces. However, the difference in instrumentation between Piece 1 and 2 is distinctly diverging, and this, in turn, creates an entire different sound and atmosphere between the two works. For example, as Copland’s piece is set for the Wild West, different instrumentation is utilized to resemble this concept, such as the woodblocks in bar 165, sleigh bells in bar 149, and the gourd in bar 168.
The use of such abstract instruments to help portray a specific image is more common in the modern era than it was in the Classical or even Romantic eras. As such, Smetana’s composition incorporates the traditional orchestral instruments, though a harp is added in order to contribute to the flowing nature of the piece.
Harmony
Piece one begins in the key of Ab Major, which helps achieve its happy and carefree nature. Contrastingly, Piece 2 begins in the key of E minor, producing a more serious and vehement nature. The modulations used by Smetana are much more clear and evident in contrast to those written by Copland. This is an aspect that is typical of compositions from the Classical and Romantic eras, as opposed to the atonal keys and unpredictable key changes utilized in modernistic compositions. Copland uses an excessive number of accidentals throughout the piece (for example, in bar 44 – 51), making it difficult to establish the tonic key and modulations within. Thus, Piece 1 is much more atonal than Piece 2, and experiments with different keys and sounds, typical of the 20th century.
However, both pieces indicate their intended tonalities, albeit more subtly in Piece 1, through the constant recurrence of the tonal key throughout the piece, or the numerous pedal notes sound on the original tonic or dominant note.
The string section produces the harmonies heard in piece 2, by playing single low-pitched notes of short value. These notes are based on broken chords that signify the key and harmony. Comparatively, piece 1 forms their harmonies with chordal notes, spread over a number of instruments. In doing this, the texture appears to be thinner, with an exposed sound that corresponds with the Wild West atmosphere.
Melody
There is one main similarity evident in the melodic lines between Piece 1 and Piece 2: the constant return of a melodic idea. In Piece 1, the first theme presented returns numerous times in the first half of the piece, and the fifth theme returns regularly in the second half of the piece. As Smetana follows a strict structure, Piece 2 clearly utilizes the return of the flowing river theme throughout the movement. As another similarity, both pieces use ornamentation within their melodic lines.
In saying this, however, the melodic lines highly contrast between these two pieces. The melodies used by Smetana are fast flowing and vigorous at times (seen in bar 40 onwards), in comparison to Copland’s light, laid back and insouciant melodic lines. Once again, this contrast is used to represent the different themes and ideas intended, as well as the storylines being portrayed.
Additionally, Smetana incorporates a larger range of notes in his melodic lines (e.g. beginning section from bars 1 – 40), in comparison to the smaller range used in Copland’s melodies (e.g. bar 165 – 188). The fact that Copland doesn’t use the entire range possible on each instrument is somewhat alternate to the traditional modernistic compositions that tend to do exactly that. Perhaps Copland intended to limit the ranges of the instruments in order to keep in touch with the nationalistic side of his work and to help portray the Wild West image.